Development and modernization of the Tor-M2 air defense system

52
Development and modernization of the Tor-M2 air defense system
SAM "Tor-M2", involved in the Special Operation, February 2023


Over the past few decades, the short-range anti-aircraft missile system "Tor" has been in service with our army. During operation and production, it has been repeatedly upgraded, incl. with the creation of completely new modifications. As reported, the upgrade process does not stop, and right now work is underway on the next upgrade of the current version of the Tor-M2 complex.



New goals


The last representative of the Tor family, adopted by the military air defense of the Russian army, is the 9K332 Tor-M2 air defense system. Through the introduction of a number of new components, incl. modern guided missile, it has significant advantages over other complexes of the line. At the same time, the development of the SAM line does not stop, and the necessary work is being carried out.

Recent ones news The modernization of the Tor-M2 air defense system was received on March 15 from the TASS agency. Fanil Ziyatdinov, General Director of the Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant (IEMZ) Kupol, told him about the work. The head of the manufacturing organization noted that work on the modernization of the Tor-M2 complex continues and does not stop. During this process, the air defense system gets the opportunity to hit new types of air targets, incl. just appearing.

Specialists of IEMZ "Kupol" assess the potential of the complex, as well as perform mathematical modeling of its combat work for various purposes, incl. promising. When appropriate opportunities arise, the calculations are checked in practice, after which the actual results are evaluated.


F. Ziyatdinov also outlined the main ways of development of "Tora-M2" and the goals of this process. According to him, the applied technical solutions can significantly improve the characteristics of air defense systems in the context of detecting small targets. In addition, the degree of automation continues to increase. All major processes will be performed with little or no operator involvement. A person will only have to give a start command, and the complex will do the rest.

When such results will be obtained, and how soon the updated equipment with improved characteristics will go to the troops, the general director of the Dome did not specify. It can be expected that the enterprise is doing everything possible to complete the work as soon as possible and quickly update the air defense systems in the troops.

The modern complex


The Tor-M2 product, like its predecessors, is a short-range self-propelled anti-aircraft missile system. This air defense system is intended for military air defense, which determines the range of tasks to be solved. "Tors" must accompany the troops and protect them from air attacks on the march, in positions or in places of deployment.

The main element of the 9K332 Tor-M2 air defense system is the 9A331M2 combat vehicle. It is an autonomous combat vehicle and can solve all tasks independently; it is possible to be included in units of different composition using other air defense systems. The machine is built on a tracked chassis with high mobility and cross-country characteristics, due to which it is able to accompany any military equipment.


The combat vehicle carries a tower module with the necessary equipment. It has its own radar station for detecting targets, equipment for determining nationality, as well as a radar and an optoelectronic guidance station. Without using external target designation, Tor-M2 controls the air situation within a radius of 32 km.

Especially for the latest modification of the "Torah" was developed ZUR 3M338K. The missiles are supplied in transport and launch containers with several cells for vertical launch. The combat module of the 9A331M2 vehicle holds 16 missiles. Reloading is carried out using a crane installation on a transport-loading machine.

The 3M338K missile is equipped with a radio command guidance system; The guidance radar has four control channels. With the help of a solid-propellant engine, ZUR develops a speed of up to 1000 m / s. The launch range reaches 12 km, the height of the defeat is 10 km. The missile is capable of maneuvering with a longitudinal overload of up to 30 units, which ensures hitting a target with an overload of up to 10-12.

The combat crew of the air defense system consists of three people. The driver controls the chassis, and the operator and commander are responsible for the use of anti-aircraft weapons. The transfer of the complex from the traveling position to the combat position is carried out by calculation; it takes no more than 3 minutes.

Circle of tasks


SAM 9K332 "Tor-M2" is intended to combat a wide range of air attack weapons that threaten the ground forces. He must detect and hit tactical aircraft aviation, attack and transport-combat helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles of various classes, as well as various samples of high-precision weapons air and other bases.


During tests and numerous exercises, Torah-M2 and their crews have repeatedly demonstrated effective combat against all intended targets. Since 2015, such air defense systems have been participating in the defense of the Russian Khmeimim airbase in Syria. They have repeatedly had to intercept aerial targets in the form of commercial or homemade UAVs with combat payloads. Larger targets, such as full-fledged aircraft, are virtually non-existent in this theater.

Since February 2022, a large number of Tor-M2 air defense systems have been participating in the Special Operation to protect Donbass. This time, the complexes solve more complex problems and work with a wider range of purposes. The enemy still retains combat aircraft and guided weapons for it. In addition, Ukrainian formations widely use a variety of Drones and rocket artillery, incl. modern foreign samples.

For well-known reasons, it is UAVs and rockets that most often appear in the airspace and are the main targets for Russian air defense. Reportedly, "Tor-M2" and other domestic air defense systems are quite capable of fighting such targets and show high efficiency. Radar or optical means successfully detect drones and provide missile guidance. SAMs from the 9K332 complex also demonstrate high efficiency.

With all this, the interception of some targets, mainly small UAVs, is quite difficult. In addition, the enemy and his suppliers monitor our air defense and their losses, and draw the necessary conclusions. Various measures are being taken to protect new and promising UAVs and other products from detection and exposure to anti-aircraft weapons.


All this imposes additional requirements on our air defense systems. It is necessary not only to maintain the effectiveness of combat work, but also to improve all the main characteristics. It is for this purpose that the works recently mentioned by the general director of IEMZ "Kupol" are being carried out. Their result will be another improvement of the Tor-M2 serial air defense system, which is widely used among the troops.

It should be noted that not only complexes of the Tor family are in service with our military air defense. There are other products and systems that must also deal with all current and future threats. Apparently, not only IEMZ "Kupol" is engaged in the development of its developments, taking into account the recently gained experience. Similar work should be done at other enterprises.

In the process of development


At the moment, the military air defense of the Russian army has a number of anti-aircraft systems and complexes of different classes with high performance. An important place in it is occupied by the Tor-M2 air defense system. Such complexes demonstrate high performance and effectively intercept various targets, from drones to missiles.

At the same time, Tor-M2 continues to develop. As a result of the next stage of improvements, its characteristics will increase, and in addition, the complex will be able to deal with completely new threats, incl. while absent from the enemy. It remains only to wait for the completion of work and the appearance of updated air defense systems in the troops.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    March 17 2023
    I am pleased with the systematic work and modernization, taking into account combat use. Here you can draw real conclusions and work on practical shortcomings.
    The main thing in this complex is the sufficiency and ability to perform the assigned tasks.
    good
    * * *
    Unfortunately, nothing is heard about the application and identification of the shortcomings of the more expensive products of the "analogue worldnet" series.
    1. +6
      March 17 2023
      How is it "nothing heard"? You're just bad at listening. Only recently applied. And the ancient dill confirmed that they cannot shoot down either the Dagger or Iskander - the very ones from the series of "analogues in the world". So, no flaws were found :). Is it logical?...
      1. +5
        March 17 2023
        I saw the work of "Thor" on UAVs 100% defeat. Then another "Thor" opened up and not only "sees" well along the flight path and artillery and MLRS, it would be nice to combine a reconnaissance and control network with the Air Force and artillery.
        1. +1
          March 17 2023
          it is UAVs and rockets ... that are the main targets for Russian air defense. Reportedly, "Tor-M2" ... is able to deal with such targets and shows high efficiency.

          —-Well done!

          —-“... The probability of hitting a target of the "aircraft" type with one missile is from 0,3 to 0,77, helicopters are hit with a probability of 0,5-0,88, unmanned aerial vehicles - 0,85-0,95. Provides protection against targets moving at speeds up to 700 m / s, or 2M ... ”2 missiles are used to destroy an aircraft ... if Ro \u77d .2, then Rd \u77d 23x (.77x.77) + (.95x.3) \u2d ~ .3… [however, if Po = .7, then Pd = 3x(.3x.51) + (.XNUMXx.XNUMX) =~.XNUMX - which is naturally not enough for this purpose…]

          —- "Tor" is designed to cover important ... economic and military facilities, the first echelons of land formations ... including "stealth" objects ... It was developed as a divisional autonomous self-propelled air defense system. The main mode of operation of the Tor complex is the separate operation of each battery, however, there is also a mode of centralized control by the head of the air defense division or the commander of the anti-aircraft missile regiment ... "

          —-“… automation continues to increase… the main processes will be carried out ~ without the participation of the operator. Man - only to give the command to start ... ". VIKA: “...At present, it can work both manually, with the participation of operators, and in automatic mode. "Thor" itself controls the indicated airspace and independently captures all air targets ... ".

          —- For 2020 - 120 installations of all modifications ... by mid-September 2022 ... several Tors were captured.

          --- The cost of protected objects dominates in determining the effectiveness of air defense systems. And what is the comparative cost of the 3M338K missile for UAVs and rockets used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine?
          Here is “Chief Designer Yeletsky: the destruction of such an UAV-like “punks” of the expensive 9M338 (with a radar guidance head) was considered effective, but “not the most effective solution.”
          1. -3
            March 17 2023
            3M338 is a radio command missile, Tor-M2 performance is limited to 4 channels
            solution on the surface
            1. we need a new missile defense system with a semi-active seeker
            2. increase BC to 32 missiles
            0. it makes no sense to install a new AFAR radar to increase the detection range and the number of channels, since the missile defense system will be with a semi-active seeker
            1. +3
              March 17 2023
              The semi-active seeker just needs a backlight. Why is AFAR needed, which can accompany many targets. An active seeker does not need to be accompanied, as it has its own radar. It is pointless to put such a thing on Thor, this is for Bukov and C300 / 400. Buk M3 has such a missile with radar, it was she who showed high efficiency against hymers, but there are few of them.
          2. +2
            March 18 2023
            Quote: Mikhail Drabkin
            “... The probability of hitting a target of the “aircraft” type with one missile is from 0,3 to 0,77, helicopters are hit with a probability of 0,5-0,88, unmanned aerial vehicles - 0,85-0,95.

            These are the probabilities of hitting the target at different points in the affected area. The minimum values ​​correspond to the far and/or near border of the affected area. As you move away from the near boundary of the affected area, the probability first increases to a maximum value, and then decreases towards the far boundary of the affected area.
        2. -1
          March 17 2023
          Quote: Mikhail Maslov
          I saw the work of "Thor" on UAVs 100% defeat. Then another "Thor" opened up and not only "sees" well along the flight path and artillery and MLRS, it would be nice to combine a reconnaissance and control network with the Air Force and artillery.

          Here, one writer wrote that air defense systems cannot shoot down barrel artillery shells. You say you see.
          Then the question is why they cannot combine the capabilities of the TORA radar and the Zoo in terms of computing capabilities. There will be an excellent anti-battery complex.
          As one has already said, it is better to entrust the development of anti-battery systems to Diamond Antey; they already have successful experience in the Aistenok radar.
          1. 0
            March 20 2023
            Quote: insafufa
            Here, one writer wrote that air defense systems cannot shoot down barrel artillery shells. You say you see.

            So see и knock down - these are different things.
            To "see" you only need a radar with good resolution.
            And for "shooting down" - a missile defense system, the warhead of which is capable of penetrating the body of the projectile (the same body that can withstand overloads during acceleration from zero to 800 m / s at only 6 meters of the barrel length) and cause explosive detonation.
  2. +9
    March 17 2023
    Why is absolutely nothing heard about Tunguska? Not a single mention in your own, as if they were not in the troops at all
    1. +3
      March 17 2023
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Why is absolutely nothing heard about Tunguska? Not a single mention in your own, as if they were not in the troops at all

      Indeed, one does not hear about the "Tunguska", although according to the current needs for barreled air defense from UAVs and "Shilka" would not be superfluous.
      But Motolygs with old shipborne ZAU 25 mm, DShK and KPVT on turrets on the backs of Motolygs are already in frames, articles, discussions.
      "It would be nice to equip the Tunguska with well-programmable ammunition ... or even change the combat module to the Pantsir - for the sake of cross-country ability and the ability to normally accompany troops on the march.
      1. +5
        March 18 2023
        Quote: bayard
        "Tunguska would be well-programmable ammunition to equip ...

        Tunguska needs to change all RES. And in the end you get Pantsir-SM.
        1. 0
          March 18 2023
          Quote: Comet
          Tunguska needs to change all RES. And in the end you get Pantsir-SM.

          So maybe this is worth doing? Or even this is what they finally did, and therefore not to see the "Tungusok" in the NWO? I would like to do just that.
    2. +2
      March 17 2023
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Why is absolutely nothing heard about Tunguska?
      The cone of destruction created by our anti-aircraft guns is designed for aircraft, UAVs and missiles are too small for it. All purely IMHO.
    3. +3
      March 17 2023
      I already wrote on this topic, I saw 4 "Tunguskas" working in the protection of one unit and another 4 were transported on tractors to the border area.
    4. +3
      March 18 2023
      I was interested in military equipment in my youth, and so the Tunguska was praised for its efficiency, but it’s not a reliable machine, it’s complicated. Given that it was released relatively long ago, they are simply inoperative. I really liked this car, just beautiful and powerful, the product of the "gloomy Soviet genius."
  3. +1
    March 17 2023
    participates in the Special Operation for the Defense of Donbass

    This is the first time I've heard such a phrase. Now it is so officially called or author's liberties in the wording?
    1. +1
      March 17 2023
      The Supreme same goals changed. Now so.
      1. 0
        March 17 2023
        When did it change? Can I have a link to the application?
      2. +4
        March 18 2023
        Lie and don’t lie Ivan, maybe you are not Ivan at all.
  4. Eug
    +4
    March 17 2023
    As for me, there are two key problems - reducing the cost of missiles and increasing guidance channels. Successoff!
  5. +2
    March 17 2023
    It seems that there were plans of the Ministry of Defense to change the structure of the military air defense - it was planned to transfer the Tor air defense system to the regiments (1 battery each), and at the division level to have a more long-range Buk (either a regiment or a division). But everything seems to have come to naught (maybe due to the lack of Beeches?) ...
    But in reality, this could significantly improve the situation - then the motorized rifle regiment would have an anti-aircraft division (a battery of 4 Thors, a Tunguska zrab and a MANPADS battery (3-4 Eagle platoons).
  6. +1
    March 17 2023
    The launch range reaches 12 km, the height of the defeat is 10 km
    The slant launch range is 16 km! And the "altitude" - yes ... 10 km!
    For some reason, not a "sound" about the development of "anti-aircraft nails" for "TOR"! No. But they promised! Yes Just development "on the topic"! And I'm waiting! I am waiting for the appearance of missiles with GOS! I think that it also makes sense to develop missiles in the weight and size characteristics of 9M330 / 331 (8 missiles per installation ...), but with a greater launch range and "altitude" than 9M338K, and with seeker ...
  7. 0
    March 17 2023
    However, Belgorod was attacked again last night, the missiles were shot down, there were no casualties. But the shopping complex and the PF building received damage. And the cars and the recovery train (another downed missile) were also damaged. All damage was from debris. They hit the railway station, but air defense once again it worked great.
  8. +4
    March 17 2023
    "Thor" is an expensive thing to shoot down UAVs. Don't you think? Compare the prices of drones and missiles .. It's a pity the topic of installing Thors on warships has not been disclosed .. But the topic is interesting

    [Center]
    1. +1
      March 17 2023
      Quote: quaric
      Compare the prices of drones and rockets.
      Compare the price of a rocket and RVS with diesel fuel, which this drone is able to burn
      Or it can be compared with a tank farm, sometimes the enemy is lucky.
      These comparisons are stupid, PMSM.
      1. +3
        March 17 2023
        This takes the war to a different economic plane, when for the same amount of money the means of attack can be produced hundreds of times more than the means of defense against these means of attack. As an emergency temporary solution - of course, but in the context of a protracted conflict, this is a dead end and a loss.
        1. -1
          August 5 2023
          It is impossible to win while defending, therefore other types of offensive weapons must destroy the places of production and storage of enemy attack means, as well as hit command posts that give Orders for its use, as well as control points for such weapons ...
          Roughly speaking, it’s good to shoot down the UAV Fury, but this will not lead to victory, but if, after each departure of the Fury, cover the Fury’s control point, killing the operators, and also cover the headquarters of the unit in whose interests this Fury collected information, then let it be victories ... Because the speed of riveting furies is many times higher than the speed of riveting control points and training operators ...
          And if you still cover the place of production and the place of training, then there will be even more sense.
    2. 0
      March 17 2023
      To combat small drones, additional missiles of the Strela-10 type are still needed, only upgraded, capable of shooting down microscopic targets like Maviks, preferably at a larger radius than 5 km. It is also worth considering the creation of kamikaze drones for interception with radar-guided air defense systems.
    3. 0
      March 20 2023
      Quote: quaric
      It’s a pity the topic of installing Thors on warships has not been disclosed .. But the topic is interesting

      What is there to reveal? The Tor-M2KM land autonomous combat module (as in your photos) for a ship is an ersatz that can only quickly close a hole in air defense or arm a mobilized civilian ship.
      Why ersatz? Because this module has an absolutely insufficient BC for the ship (this can be adjusted on land with a TZM, at sea there is no such possibility outside the base). Rigidly attached to the radar module, when the module is installed on the deck, it is obscured by ship structures, which causes dead sectors to appear. The rotating "tower" of the module for the ship is not needed at all. But to remove the TPK and the control cabin below deck and cover them with at least some kind of protection is more than necessary.

      Ship SAM MD must be modular. But not a single module, but a set of standard modules, configurable depending on the displacement and purpose of the ship. Radar modules - separately so that they can be placed in places where there would be the largest field of view and the best EM compatibility. The control module - separately, it is possible in general in the form of a set of places for operators and commanders for installation in the CIC. PU modules (in the required quantity) - separately, again for the best placement in terms of ease of launch and survivability. In general, as with the Kinzhal air defense system, only without monstrous drums weighing the size of a land-based Torah launcher. Or as on the long-suffering "Tor-MF", which the "Dome" can not torture out in any way. smile
  9. -1
    March 17 2023
    I want to think badly in connection with giving preference to the Shells and not the TORs, although the latter are many times superior to the former .. It's time to return the NKVD ... this question stinks painfully .. And as a result ... yes, you yourself see how few TORs are .. .
    1. -2
      March 17 2023
      We need both "Tors and Pantseri" and you yourself see it is not enough to close the narrow sections.
    2. -1
      March 17 2023
      And why does Thor have a firing range of only 12 km, with a detection range of as much as 32 km? And at what distance will Thor himself be detected by an UAV, after which Arta or Hymars will hit Thor? We'll have to call the calculation of the Shell to work out, there seems to be a range of 20 km, and after modernization even 40 km.
      1. 0
        March 18 2023
        Quote: Arigin
        And why does Thor have a firing range of only 12 km, with a detection range of as much as 32 km?

        Target detection range with EPR 0.1 m ^ 2 - 22 km.
    3. +2
      March 18 2023
      Quote: Igorash
      I want to think badly in connection with giving preference to the Shells and not the TORs, although the latter are many times superior to the former.

      What do they excel in?
  10. 0
    March 17 2023
    Yes, Tunguska has completely disappeared from sight. Never showed up in action. Only destroyed.
  11. +2
    March 17 2023
    To combat drones, interceptor drones are needed
  12. 0
    March 17 2023
    Can anyone, from those who are "in the know", outline the strengths and weaknesses of "Thor" and "Shell"? As far as I understand, they are direct competitors?
    1. 0
      March 18 2023
      Your interest is understandable, but of those who are "in the subject" they will not write a single line here, and they will be absolutely right. I would like to think that work with industry is in full swing and products are being modernized to meet modern realities and threats. And so - yes, competitors, two approaches to one problem. IMHO, the shell is stronger.
    2. 0
      2 May 2023
      Their aerodynamic schemes of missiles are very different and the radars operate in different frequency ranges. Well, the other circuitry is excellent.
    3. -1
      August 5 2023
      In theory, the torus is army air defense, and the shell is this VKS vehicle, although in the conditions of the database everything is mixed up ...
      That is, in simple terms, the torus should cover the soldiers, and the shell should cover military and civilian infrastructure ...
      The advantage of the torus is its all-roundness, the ability to work on the march, a very small dead zone is roughly there only vertically above it.
      The shell has a greater range, the presence of artillery weapons for close range, as well as self-defense. Accordingly, from the minuses - there is no all-perspective, there is no possibility to work on the move.
  13. 0
    March 18 2023
    Recently, a video filmed by a Nazi UAV showed how an American kamikaze drone hits a moving TOP. For some reason, the latter did nothing to somehow protect himself. It seems that TOR simply did not see either the reconnaissance UAV hanging over it, or the kamikaze drone that flew in on its tip. The same story happened with our S-300V, which stood in position, without the cover of the Pantsir or TOR, and was also hit by a kamikaze drone. That's what needs to be worked on to exclude such insulting losses.
    1. 0
      March 18 2023
      Quote: wladimirjankov
      That's what needs to be worked on to exclude such insulting losses.

      And how to work?
  14. +1
    March 18 2023
    Why does everyone write only bravura articles on the Torah and not a single message about how they are carried out by loitering ammunition of the Armed Forces of Ukraine? There are a lot of videos on this topic in telegrams, about Karabakh where the Torahs were smashed into the trash, I generally keep quiet. You read these articles on VO and it seems that the Russian Federation has the most impenetrable air defense, and in fact it is now being carried out by the simplest drones and there is not a word about this in any article.
    1. 0
      March 19 2023
      Quote from: mad-max78
      Why does everyone write only bravura articles on the Torah

      Because Thor (especially 2M) works great in NWO.

      Quote from: mad-max78
      and not a single message about how they are carried out by loitering ammunition of the Armed Forces of Ukraine? There is a lot of video on this topic in telegram,

      Full - how much, given the duplication of these videos? What are the statistics of the hit Thors in relation to the hit Tors of the SVN? When you see these statistics, you will understand why "not a single message as they endure."

      Quote from: mad-max78
      about Karabakh, where the Torahs were smashed into the trash, I generally keep quiet. You read these articles on VO and it seems that the Russian Federation has the most impenetrable air defense, and in fact it is now being carried out by the simplest drones and there is not a word about this in any article.

      This is how provocateurs manifest themselves by referring to Karabakh. Everything about Karabakh has long been analyzed in detail even in the public information sphere. "But in fact ..." - the fact is just the opposite.
    2. 0
      March 20 2023
      Quote from: mad-max78
      about Karabakh, where the Torahs were smashed into the trash, I generally keep quiet.

      So Karabakh is a great example of "how not to build air defense." A set of air defense systems that are not connected to each other, do not have mutual cover and do not work in a single system - this is not air defense.
      Specifically, for the Karabakh "Tor" - the departure of the BM for reloading must necessarily be covered by other vehicles of the division. The sector should not remain "naked". I'm not talking about the fact that it was necessary to nail the reconnaissance UAV passing the air defense system.
      We were taught that air defense is strong system. And if the division is forced to work alone, without coordination with its neighbors and the headquarters from the headquarters, then it will live poorly and not for long - until the first broadcast.
  15. 0
    March 19 2023
    Dear author, please comment on the video of the defeat of the TOR-M2 air defense system by the Ukrainian kamikaze drone. Or request a comment from the manufacturer of these complexes. I give a link: https://voenhronika.ru/publ/vojna_na_ukraine/19_03_2023_novosti_vojny_na_ukraine_putin_v_mariupole_karta_boevykh_dejstvij_segodnja_bakhmut_avdeevskaja_mjasorubka_14_video/60-1-0-13763
    The video shows that the TOR-M2 is in a combat position. However, neither an observing enemy reconnaissance drone nor an attacking kamikaze drone are affected. How is this to be understood? After all, such a machine scans the surrounding space, and if the attack is overslept for some reason, the cassette should automatically work, throwing a blinding cloud of dipoles towards the attacking drone. Or again saved on matches.
    1. 0
      March 20 2023
      Quote from usm5
      Dear author, please comment on the video of the defeat of the TOR-M2 air defense system by the Ukrainian kamikaze drone. Or request a comment from the manufacturer of these complexes. I give a link: https://voenhronika.ru/publ/vojna_na_ukraine/19_03_2023_novosti_vojny_na_ukraine_putin_v_mariupole_karta_boevykh_dejstvij_segodnja_bakhmut_avdeevskaja_mjasorubka_14_video/60-1-0-13763
      The video shows that the TOR-M2 is in a combat position. However, neither an observing enemy reconnaissance drone nor an attacking kamikaze drone are affected. How is this to be understood? After all, such a machine scans the surrounding space, and if the attack is overslept for some reason, the cassette should automatically work, throwing a blinding cloud of dipoles towards the attacking drone. Or again saved on matches.

      Not the author, but I'll try to comment.
      1. There should be no forest / forest plantations near the position of the target detection radar.
      2. How was the modification of Thor determined?
      1. 0
        March 20 2023
        Quote: Comet
        Quote from usm5
        Dear author, please comment on the video of the defeat of the TOR-M2 air defense system by the Ukrainian kamikaze drone. Or request a comment from the manufacturer of these complexes. I give a link: https://voenhronika.ru/publ/vojna_na_ukraine/19_03_2023_novosti_vojny_na_ukraine_putin_v_mariupole_karta_boevykh_dejstvij_segodnja_bakhmut_avdeevskaja_mjasorubka_14_video/60-1-0-13763
        The video shows that the TOR-M2 is in a combat position. However, neither an observing enemy reconnaissance drone nor an attacking kamikaze drone are affected. How is this to be understood? After all, such a machine scans the surrounding space, and if the attack is overslept for some reason, the cassette should automatically work, throwing a blinding cloud of dipoles towards the attacking drone. Or again saved on matches.

        Not the author, but I'll try to comment.
        1. There should be no forest / forest plantations near the position of the target detection radar.
        2. How was the modification of Thor determined?

        The air defense system really stood near the forest belt, but the attack with its drone was carried out from the side of an open field. By the way, the presence of such rare vegetation does not shield radio waves much, but they are a serious threat to the drone. The reconnaissance drone operator identified the air defense system as TOR-M2. Very similar in appearance. By the way, this air defense system and reconnaissance drone did not even try to shoot down. Either there is a slovenly crew or they ran out of BC. But in the latter case, they had to maneuver to try to get away from the attack. Your explanations did not satisfy me
        1. 0
          March 20 2023
          Quote from usm5
          The air defense system really stood near the forest belt, but the attack with its drone was carried out from the side of an open field. By the way, the presence of such rare vegetation does not shield radio waves much,

          Did I write something about shielding radio waves? I wrote about the fact that there should not be a forest / forest plantations near the target detection radar. This is not done on the video.
          Quote from usm5
          The reconnaissance drone operator identified the air defense system as TOR-M2. Very similar in appearance.

          And how does Tor-M2 differ from Tor-M2U and Tor-M1 in appearance?
          Quote from usm5
          By the way, this air defense system and reconnaissance drone did not even try to shoot down. Either there is a slovenly crew or they ran out of BC. But in the latter case, they had to maneuver to try to get away from the attack.

          Or they might not have seen their radar detection in time. Forests / forest plantations should not be nearby. Or the SOC did not work for radiation at all.
          Quote from usm5
          Your explanations did not satisfy me

          What would you like to hear?
          1. 0
            March 21 2023
            Quote: Comet
            Quote from usm5
            The air defense system really stood near the forest belt, but the attack with its drone was carried out from the side of an open field. By the way, the presence of such rare vegetation does not shield radio waves much,

            Did I write something about shielding radio waves? I wrote about the fact that there should not be a forest / forest plantations near the target detection radar. This is not done on the video.
            Quote from usm5
            The reconnaissance drone operator identified the air defense system as TOR-M2. Very similar in appearance.

            And how does Tor-M2 differ from Tor-M2U and Tor-M1 in appearance?
            Quote from usm5
            By the way, this air defense system and reconnaissance drone did not even try to shoot down. Either there is a slovenly crew or they ran out of BC. But in the latter case, they had to maneuver to try to get away from the attack.

            Or they might not have seen their radar detection in time. Forests / forest plantations should not be nearby. Or the SOC did not work for radiation at all.
            Quote from usm5
            Your explanations did not satisfy me

            What would you like to hear?

            I asked you, on behalf of the publication, to ask the manufacturer of this complex to comment on this video and let you know if they are going to do something so that our expensive air defense systems are not destroyed by penny drones. I suggested how this can be done.
            1. 0
              March 21 2023
              Quote from usm5
              I asked you, on behalf of the publication, to ask the manufacturer of this complex to comment on this video and let you know if they are going to do something so that our expensive air defense systems are not destroyed by penny drones.

              And why should they comment on something to you?

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"